Friday, November 28, 2014

Droughts and Heatwaves: Ocean Oscillations vs CO2 by Jim Steele - examined


This is the continuation of my interrupted critical review of Mr. Jim Steele's recent spat of YouTube videos attacking the fundamentals of climatological understanding.  In my previous review I transcribed all of Jim's talk, but after finishing my first draft this time I decided that was too much of a waste of time and space.  So from here on I'll limit myself to transcribing key quotes and going from there.  The entire video is included for those who want to hear every word.


#2 Droughts and Heatwaves: Ocean Oscillations vs CO2
Jim Steele 
{in Courier font}
0:01  {picking up the talk mid-stream} "...how much does it (global warming) contribute to drought or how well does people that push "its CO2": "How do we know it's CO2?  We look at their models." 

Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Happy Thanksgiving Mr. Anthony WUWT and NPR

{edited 1/27/14 am to add some information about North Dakota's oil boom}

Mr. Watts, I read your gleeful headline: "We’re winning – National Public Radio guts its climate reporting team."  I'm thinking that could be your best line ever, perfectly summing up the Republican/Libertarian mentality and their agenda when it comes to learning about our home planet:
"Shut up, go away! It's about THE ECONOMY STUPID !"

Or as Anne Gudenkauf, senior supervising editor of NPR’s science desk puts it'the environment doesn’t necessarily requires dedicated reporters.'  
Who cares about our wondrous planet or the biosphere we all depend on.

Yes sir, Mr. WUWT, you, Gudenkauf and your Republican/Libertarian boosters have much to be thankful for this holiday season.  Although, old NPR listeners know full well, this is just the latest amputation of the once proud NPR.  Like a hapless creature being pulled apart by some nasty kids, Republican/Libertarian money interests have been having their way with NPR for quite a while now.  Not as fast or hard as they originally wanted, and once in a while NPR still come through, such as their recent Ebola coverage; nice job, that one.  Still overall, the masters of our universe got the puppy dog public radio they sought.  

Sad thing is, it goes well beyond NPR.  Consider, those changes at NPR would have been impossible had a motivated 'we the people' - you know, an engaged electorate - defended NPR against the special interests.  

But, no.  It's as though every year less and less people want to know about any of it.  As though apathy towards our life sustaining biosphere has become the new coping mechanism in the face of current difficulties and those frightening, but indisputable, trends and changes that are afoot all around us.

I know, i know, Anthony, you simply don't want to hear about it. 

And what's next? Why not shut down observations, and scientific studies? Perhaps you can destroy some scientific records?  Oh yea, already happening big time in Canada, of all places, (see following notes).  That way when keeping track of their oil spill "incidents" they can rubber-stamp the reports "No reported impacts to any water body or wildlife" - nothing to compare it to, nothing to report.  How tidy, fulfilling their commitment to society. Yes, sir.  

When it comes to our society's impacts on the atmosphere, oceans and climate, your message is loud and clear: SHUT UP.  
If forced to hear the news;  you'll refuse to consider it,
outright attack it and then attack the messengers.
You already have your truth, don't need no more.  

It's ludicrous and it's tragic, but it's your story and you're sticking to it, happy thanksgiving to you all and the children in your respective lives.  They will learn to appreciate what you have done.

Sincerely, CC

I've included Anthony's subsequent post regarding latest NPR emasculating, he didn't have anything else to add.  One sentence said it all.  Following that some further reading.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watts Up With That | October 25, 2014
From InsideClimate News: (hat tip to Michael E. Mann)

Sunday, November 23, 2014

Food For Thought

A collection of recent attempts to examine contrarian tactics and the challenge of communicating with those who don't want to listen.


Friday, November 21, 2014
Secret Life of Trolls Part 3: Hoyt's Showdown - examined

Rosi did something most hide from and for good reason. Going face to face with a contrarian, a long time insurance exec no less, a man who's got the domination thing down, not to mention the tactical speaking skills, is a formidable challenge. Rosi broke the ice, I want to build on that with this long winded review. Besides my own learning exercise, I want to share it with anyone interested in better understanding climate science contrarian tactics. 

Prequel

For starters, anyone who steps out into that arena should be aware that contrarians aren't into hearing your concepts or arguments. They are about emotional gamesmanship. Your opponent will deliberately sidestep the essence of what you are conveying and launch diversions to throw you off balance, as this video demonstrates.

They will scrabble your prepared remarks by matching what you are trying to explain with something from left field, then inappropriately cutting and pasting valid objections from one topic into another. Then while you're back peddling to straighten out the misinformation, they pile it on.

Keep in mind most of these intelligent serious global warming science denialists types, were men of power in previous lives. They've got decades worth of business/negotiating skills and a ruthlessness you won't learn in college. Get to recognize how the truth of a matter doesn't interest them in the slightest. Notice how it's all about the game of f'ing with your presentation. Unfortunately, it's always been easier to be a vandal than a builder, so beware all who enter within.

I'd be awful at the public debate myself. I want it in writing. Sitting here behind this keyboard absorbing the exchange and having all the time in the world to ponder each sentence and response allows me to do a better job than Rosi did. Rosi, James my apologies if the following seems hard ball, it is, but it comes from a constructive desire; and it's the only way we learn and grow. 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Thursday, November 20, 2014
Trollus Maximus, HoytC, Secret Life of Trolls #1 examined

In May 2013 ClimateDesk.org put together an interesting series of short videos looking at the phenomena of internet trolls who disrupt serious dialogue thus taking everyone's Eyes Off The Prize.  I came across it in preparation for Steele's videos, wanting to take my review up a notch.

The Climate Desk video's contained revealing footage and seems like an effort begging for some further attention including a bit of serious commentary.  I'll give it a try, outlining the talk and sharing Hoyt's quotes along with my commentary. 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Monday, November 17, 2014
Considering the demarcation between valid science and pseudo-science

...    I got sidetracked into wondering about the mind's ability to ignore important valid information.  And I took an excursion into Massimo Pigiucci's "Nonsense on Stills."  His book inspired me to look him up on the internet and among other information I found some interviews.  I think he does a good job of outlining the problem for a novice like me.  

Since I like to imagine there are some other novice students of life looking in on these pages, I've put together highlights from his interview at "For Good Reason" and interjected some links to further reading, including a couple important videos related to climate science and the public dialogue in particular.  Given by Naomi Oreskes and Ben Santer respectively.  For good measure I've included the "Six Rules of Critical Thinking in Science". ...

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Friday, October 25, 2013
Colorado Floods - statistical certainty vs geophysical realities

Colorado experienced its most extreme weather event in memory between September 9th to the 15th. Golden, Boulder and Larimer counties received the worst of it with rain accumulations of sixteen/seventeen inches and more, some areas receiving nine inches on Thursday alone, resulting in massive flooding compounded by destructive run-off from mountainsides of burned-out forests that could no longer hold water.

Predictably folks are asking: Is this related to manmade Global Warming? It's an easy and tough question to answer.

Consider please, our climate system is a global heat distribution engine and our land, atmosphere, and the oceans have indisputably warmed, not only that, our atmosphere's moisture content has been measurably increasing. Given such geophysical realities, it is self-evident that all extreme weather events contain elements of this newly energized climate system.  And that much more of the same must be expected.

On the other hand,
it's an exceedingly difficult question to answer if the demand is to know precisely every attribution down to fine detail. Fortunately for interested citizens, scientists have been trying harder to convey their knowledge of those details. {Yet they often shoot themselves in the foot.}

For example, less than two weeks after the flooding, the Western Water Assessment (WWA) together with Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) released a preliminary report during an hour and a half long videoed web news conference. ...
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Friday, November 21, 2014

Secret Life of Trolls Part 3: Hoyt's Showdown - examined


Continued from Trollus Maximus, HoytC, Secret Life of Trolls #1 examined.  I'm skipping the second video and reviewing #3 of ClimateDesk.org's series "Meet the Climate Trolls." The "showdown" between Rosi and Hoyt provides a good study in contrarian tactics vs. science messenger mistakes.
{last edited 11/23 morning}
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Rosi did something most hide from and for good reason. Going face to face with a contrarian, a long time insurance exec no less, a man who's got the domination thing down, not to mention the tactical speaking skills, is a formidable challenge. Rosi broke the ice, I want to build on that with this long winded review. Besides my own learning exercise, I want to share it with anyone interested in better understanding climate science contrarian tactics. 

Prequel

For starters, anyone who steps out into that arena should be aware that contrarians aren't into hearing your concepts or arguments. They are about emotional gamesmanship. Your opponent will deliberately sidestep the essence of what you are conveying and launch diversions to throw you off balance, as this video demonstrates.

They will scramble your prepared remarks by matching what you are trying to explain with something from left field, then inappropriately cutting and pasting valid objections from one topic into another. Then while you're back peddling to straighten out the misinformation, they pile it on.

Keep in mind most of these intelligent serious global warming science denialists types, were men of power in previous lives. They've got decades worth of business/negotiating skills and a ruthlessness you won't learn in college. Get to recognize how the truth of a matter doesn't interest them in the slightest. Notice how it's all about the game of f'ing with your presentation. Unfortunately, it's always been easier to be a vandal than a builder, so beware all who enter within.

I'd be awful at the public debate myself. I want it in writing. Sitting here behind this keyboard absorbing the exchange and having all the time in the world to ponder each sentence and response allows me to do a better job than Rosi did. Rosi, James my apologies if the following seems hard ball, it is, but it comes from a constructive desire; and it's the only way we learn and grow.


VIDEO: The Secret Life of Trolls
Posted by James West and Tim McDonnell on Monday, May 20, 2013  

Secret Life of Trolls Part 3: #Showdown

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Trollus Maximus, HoytC, Secret Life of Trolls #1 examined




In May 2013 ClimateDesk.org put together an interesting series of short videos looking at the phenomena of internet trolls who disrupt serious dialogue thus taking everyone's Eyes Off The Prize.  I came across it in preparation for Steele's videos, wanting to take my review up a notch.

The Climate Desk video's contained revealing footage and seems like an effort begging for some further attention including a bit of serious commentary.  I'll give it a try, outlining the talk and sharing Hoyt's quotes along with my commentary.  

No quotations = my description // {...} = my commentary // Courier font = Hoyt's words.

Based on ClimateDesk.org's
VIDEO: The Secret Life of Trolls

Posted by James West and Tim McDonnell on Monday, May 20, 2013  

Climate Desk’s three-part series explores who gets to define the truth about climate change in the digital age.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Village WolfCreek Development Nov20/14 - The Game Is Afoot!

The Rio Grande National Forest has agreed to the Red McCombs Landswap offer and the future development of Alberta Park.  
For more information visit: 

Village at Wolf Creek Breaking News - 

RGNF Decides in Favor of Developing Alberta Park, 

near Wolf Creek Pass!


VWC Access Project "Final Environmental Impact Statement" index

Text of Draft index; and introduction; and background. 

"The publication of the draft record of decision in the Valley Courier starts a 45-day objection period. The final decision will be signed if no objections are received.RGNF
http://no-villageatwolfcreek.blogspot.com/2014/11/vwc-access-project-final-environmental.html

{By my math that makes it Sunday January 4th - excellent timing for the release I must say}
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

For the decision see:


Monday, November 17, 2014

Considering the demarcation between valid science and pseudo-science


I'm having some fun before I get back to Jim Steele's recent YouTube videos, where he uses every underhanded trick to distract from, and minimize, our manmade global warming situation.

You see, after digesting his second video I got sidetracked into wondering about the mind's ability to ignore important valid information.  And I took an excursion into Massimo Pigiucci's "Nonsense on Stills."  His book inspired me to look him up on the internet and among other information I found some interviews.  I think he does a good job of outlining the problem for a novice like me.  

Since I like to imagine there are some other novice students of life looking in on these pages, I've put together highlights from his interview at "For Good Reason" and interjected some links to further reading, including a couple important videos related to climate science and the public dialogue in particular.  Given by Naomi Oreskes and Ben Santer respectively.  For good measure I've included the "Six Rules of Critical Thinking in Science".

Friday, November 14, 2014

Honorable Senator Bennet why are you running away ?


{This is for the sharing, it includes a collection of a couple dozen links to important related articles, images and scientific information}
The bill was narrowly defeated, with no help from Senator Bennet, who voted in favor ! 

Keystone XL pipeline bill dies in Senate
WASHINGTON Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:50pm EST
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Senate Defeats Bill on Keystone XL Pipeline in Narrow Vote
By ASHLEY PARKER and CORAL DAVENPORTNOV. 18, 2014
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Honorable Senator Bennet, I remember shaking my head back in March when I read the stories of you turning tail on your 2010 campaign talk.  

March 25, 2013, 11:23 am 
Senator Michael Bennet says yes, Udall says no in split vote on Keystone Pipeline 
http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2013/03/25/bennet-says-yes-udall-says-no-in-split-vote-on-keystone-pipeline/93099/ 
~ ~ ~
As one of those who voted for you, it seemed to me during the 2010 campaign you sure sounded like you appreciated the destructiveness and shortsightedness of the Canadian Tar Sands project on general terms, which was reflected in your implied opposition to allowing Keystone XL pipeline to cut through the US. Now there's this:

US Senate to vote Keystone XL Tuesday 11/18 - HELP!

I want to share the following email I received, along with some more informative links, regarding the Keystone Pipeline and why it needs to be rejected: 
The bill was narrowly defeated, with no help from Senator Bennet, who voted in favor ! 

Keystone XL pipeline bill dies in Senate
WASHINGTON Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:50pm EST
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Senate Defeats Bill on Keystone XL Pipeline in Narrow Vote
By ASHLEY PARKER and CORAL DAVENPORTNOV. 18, 2014


Wednesday, November 5, 2014

#B Jim Steele's IEEE Presentation: Climate and Drought: Landscape Changes vs CO2, examined

This the second half of my review of Jim Steele's recent talk. 
The first half can be viewed at 
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2014/11/steeles-ieee-talk-landscape-changes-vs.html
{I fear tomorrow evening when I can get back to double checking these two posts, I'll find more typos then I care to, but it's too late now, and don't want to wait till tomorrow evening to post this. }


"Jim Steele's IEEE Presentation Part 1: Climate Sensitivity and Drought: Landscape Changes vs CO2" by Jim Steele

7:37  To look locally, look there's a network the US historical climate network and the nearest one where we were doing our work was in Tahoe City and there's a couple things that stood out.  The first thing was in the thirties it was warmer, so how could global warming be accumulating heat if it was warmer in the thirties.  See CO2 couldn't be, you'd have to see something higher than the thirties. Where's this accumulation.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 
Jim Steele seems to be going by the assumption that global warming means that the entire globe is suppose to warm at the same rate every where.  That's tragically disconnected from the reality of our global biosphere.  Furthermore, it's quite ironic how he shrugs off the significance of the night time trend and in fact the day time trend since 1966.

More importantly Jim's using one graph from one location and calling it a slam dunk, those who are interested in learning about what's actually happening need to cast a wider net, might I suggest:

Tahoe Climate Information Management System
A joint collaboration between the Desert Research Institute and UC Davis
- - -
Climate change in the Tahoe basin: regional trends, impacts and drivers

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

#A Jim Steele's IEEE Presentation: Climate and Drought: Landscape Changes vs CO2, examined

The other day I had the dubious serendipitous honor of being the first viewer of a YouTube video from Jim Steele a rising star within the climate science contrarian movement with a book to sell.  Jim starts his talk promising: "I think it (my talk) provides a powerful analysis, suggests powerful local solutions without worrying about global politics." and finishes it with: "I think I made it clear how much landscape change can affect the climate."

Well he didn't make anything clear except that he thinks we should ignore what scientists have learned in well over a century of study.  What I find ironic is that the same guy who says stuff like: (4:46)  There's a push to try to get rid of any kind of skepticism, there's push to try to get rid of the debate, so you see people like David Suzuki a scientist saying deny the deniers the right to deny.  To me that defiles science."

But, when I try engaging Mr. Steele in a constructive debate by asking some specific questions he replies with calling me an "internet snipers", because I'm skeptical of his claims, investigate them and have the nerve to call him on his misrepresentation.  Still he deems my questions an "orchestrated attempt to stop sincere discussion".  Then in the comments he claims I've deleted messages from him, though I haven't received anything from him - and he knows I'd be more than happy to take a close look at whatever he sends me.

As I've had the opportunity to explain to him before, we don't have to like each other to have a constructive dialogue.
If he were only up to it. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Jim Steele's IEEE Presentation Part 1: 
Climate Sensitivity and Drought: Landscape Changes vs CO2
Jim Steele

0:14  Thanks so much for inviting me to speak before the IEEE life members, my talk: "Climate change: More Optimism More Debate" is based on years of observations on how climate can change at the local level.  I think it provides a powerful analysis, suggests powerful local solutions without worrying about global politics.
0:35  I'm not a climate scientist in terms of an atmospheric scientist I'm an ecologist.
0:39  I got into the climate game trying to understand, I worked for thirty years up in the Sierra Nevada's about sixty 60 miles north Lake Tahoe and I was trying to understand how local landscape changes changes changed the local climate.   I wanted understand how natural cycles like the Pacific decadal oscillation El Ninos changed the climate and it changed wildlife.
It's very different from what you hear from people like a Jim Hansen who's a atmospheric scientist, he started studying climate by looking at planets, where there is no life where there is no oceans.  In his view a bit was very top-down he was looking at how changes in radiation changes in atmospheric gases change the radiation budget.  So he sees it from a very global perspective, I come to it from a very local perspective.
~ ~ ~
Why does Jim Steele ignore the obvious fact that our atmosphere is a very global thing, and that climate drives our weather and knows no political borders.  Local/regional conditions do influence local/regional weather patterns, but all that happens under one atmosphere who's dramatically increasing greenhouse gas concentrations are increasing the atmosphere's heat insulating ability, thus warming our global heat distribution engine, which is setting our planet on a course of the most radical ecological changes it's experienced in many millions of years.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Ignoring the IPCC

I've been going over a video that was recently (Nov 2, 2014) released by a relatively newly minted, but already notorious climate science contrarian who hides behind a cloak of feigned interest in science, while bashing every climatologist he can.  A protege' of Anthony Watts no less.  But, I'm getting ahead of myself, since there are still some hours left to go before that project will be ready to post.  

In any event, carefully listening to his words and the misch mash of partial truths woven together with pure fabrication, followed up by me tracking down the man's claims and assertions has me revisiting quite a few climate studies. In particular, there is the IPCC with it's cornucopia of information, not perfect, but as good as humans (or their endeavors) can hope to be.  A sincere serious educated effort to collect and share the full scope of up to date scientific climatological information.


I have been deeply disappointed by the various 'dog-whistle' attacks on the notion of "scientific consensus" (that would be the collective educated understanding) - that in turn has inspired me to share the following index of two of IPCC's recent reports one from Working Group One that deals with the physical basis of manmade climate change,  the other Working Group Three which deals with Mitigation of Climate Change.  


I do so because it reveals {well you would also have to spend some time looking at the chapters themselves to get the full impact} that climatologists are indeed looking at the full spectrum evidence and just as importantly that honest skepticism is alive and well within the scientific community.  Something that certainly can't be said for the likes of these Wattsonians and their one-directional skepticism.


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 


WORKING GROUP I CONTRIBUTION TO THE IPCC FIFTH ASSESSMENT REPORT CLIMATE CHANGE 2013: THE PHYSICAL SCIENCE BASIS